Comparisonandanalysisof2biogasutilizationschemes

    4個(gè)方案的對(duì)比分析見(jiàn)表1。由表1可知，4種方案總收益相差不大，其中，方案1及方案2前期建設(shè)工程投入及運(yùn)行維護(hù)費(fèi)用較小，收益較大；方案3前期建設(shè)工程費(fèi)用更小，且不存在運(yùn)行維護(hù)成本，收益，但該方案存在較大安全隱患；方案4由于前期建設(shè)工程投入及運(yùn)行維護(hù)成本高，雖然其收入為4個(gè)方案，但收益與前3個(gè)方案差別不大。    ThecomparativeanalysisofthefourschemesisshowninTable1.Itcanbeseenfromtable1thatthereislittledifferenceinthetotalbenefitsofthefourschemes.Amongthem,theinvestmentandoperationandmaintenancecostsofscheme1andscheme2arerelativelysmall,andthebenefitsarerelativelylarge;scheme3hastheminimumconstructioncosts,andthereisnooperationandmaintenancecosts,andthebenefitsarethelargest,buttherearerelativelylargepotentialsafetyhazardsinthescheme;scheme4hashighinvestmentandoperationandmaintenancecosts,althoughtheincomeisrelativelylowTheincomeofthefourschemesisthehighest,butthereislittledifferencebetweenthem.

    4種沼氣發(fā)電方案優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)

    Advantagesanddisadvantagesoffourbiogaspowergenerationschemes

    3結(jié)論

    3conclusion

    方案1:沼氣經(jīng)沼氣燃燒器回爐燃燒可回收沼氣熱量，增加了整廠的收益，且運(yùn)行穩(wěn)定、可靠。方案2:沼氣經(jīng)回噴槍回爐燃燒收益相當(dāng)于方案1,但當(dāng)焚燒爐燃燒工況不穩(wěn)定時(shí)，沼氣可能有點(diǎn)火燃燒不及時(shí)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。方案3:將沼氣抽送至垃圾坑經(jīng)濟(jì)性能更好，但綜合考慮垃圾本身產(chǎn)生的沼氣及被抽回的沼氣，沼氣濃度太高，且不易控制，增加了爆炸事故發(fā)生的可能性，故方案3存在安全隱患。方案4:沼氣熱利用效率，但設(shè)備、建設(shè)費(fèi)用較高，且該方案沼氣須經(jīng)過(guò)預(yù)處理，系統(tǒng)復(fù)雜，故障率較高。此外，上網(wǎng)發(fā)電需要增加升壓裝置，并派專(zhuān)人維護(hù)，人力及維護(hù)成本較高。由此可見(jiàn)，生活垃圾焚燒發(fā)電廠滲瀝液處理產(chǎn)生的沼氣，采用通過(guò)沼氣燃燒器回噴入爐焚燒的利用方案。   Scheme1:theheatofbiogascanberecoveredbyreturningthebiogasburnertothefurnace,increasingtheincomeofthewholeplant,andtheoperationisstableandreliable.Scheme2:thebenefitofbiogasreturningtothefurnacethroughthereturnlanceisequivalenttoscheme1,butwhenthecombustionconditionoftheincineratorisunstable,theremaybetheriskofdelayedignitionandcombustionofbiogas.Scheme3:theeconomicperformanceofpumpingbiogastothegarbagepitisthebest,butconsideringthebiogasproducedbythegarbageitselfandthebiogaspumpedback,theconcentrationofbiogasistoohighanddifficulttocontrol,whichincreasesthepossibilityofexplosionaccidents,soscheme3haspotentialsafetyhazards.Scheme4:thebiogasheatutilizationefficiencyisthehighest,buttheequipmentandconstructioncostsarehigh,andthebiogasinthisschememustbepretreated,sothesystemiscomplexandthefailurerateishigh.Inaddition,thegridpowergenerationneedstoincreasetheboosterdevice,andsendspecialpersonneltomaintain,sothecostofmanpowerandmaintenanceishigh.Itcanbeseenthatthebiogasproducedbyleachatetreatmentindomesticwasteincinerationpowerplantisbesttobeinjectedintothefurnacethroughbiogas